Nelson Vergel
Founder, ExcelMale.com
Be careful
Nandrolone Experiences
- Thread starter DS3
- Start date
Indeed. This is all good and relevant research. In fact, thinking back my testosterone decline coincided when I was taking statins and it makes sense because everything flows from cholesterol.
For me, it came down to evaluating all of the risk, my cardio doc friend ran me through a whole bunch of test – even genetic markers – looking at my family history, current lipids, calcium stress score, etc. as he put it (and I trust him - he was my best friend in college, a former bodybuilder like me, with thousands of patients) - he said take a little bit now, or someday, when your calcium score flips, you are going to need to take a shit load of it. He also said that he has patients in their 70s and 80s with no heart disease and the only similar fact was low dose statins.
I take 5 mg Crestor and my lipids are 135 total, 57 HDL, ldl 65.
If you have to go this route, use Crestor (or generic) not Lipitor. Crestor is second generation so you need less. I felt like garbage on Lipitor, plus, I think it gave me permanent tinnitus.
For me, it came down to evaluating all of the risk, my cardio doc friend ran me through a whole bunch of test – even genetic markers – looking at my family history, current lipids, calcium stress score, etc. as he put it (and I trust him - he was my best friend in college, a former bodybuilder like me, with thousands of patients) - he said take a little bit now, or someday, when your calcium score flips, you are going to need to take a shit load of it. He also said that he has patients in their 70s and 80s with no heart disease and the only similar fact was low dose statins.
I take 5 mg Crestor and my lipids are 135 total, 57 HDL, ldl 65.
If you have to go this route, use Crestor (or generic) not Lipitor. Crestor is second generation so you need less. I felt like garbage on Lipitor, plus, I think it gave me permanent tinnitus.
Jason Sypolt
Administrator
Lp(a), CRP, and Homocysteine are far, far better predictors of CVD than LDL.
Stephen_Florida
New Member
Nelson, value your opinion/rationale on eliminating zinc. Zinc along with Curcumin, Magnesium, Fish Oil and Vit D have been my top supplements for years.
Have you tested your hemoglobin or hematocrit on Deca. Doc added Deca to my protocol and I already run about 50, so I was worried the deca would add to it.Unfortunately not really in regards to muscle development. When I switched to a deca based protocol, is when this whole covid thing happened, and the gyms closed. Only thing I’ve had to workout with are two 10lb dumbbells. Cannot wait to get back into the gym!!
LDL is very necessary for optimal health. Here’s an article that briefly explains why. I obv don’t want it through the roof, just like most markers of health, I don’t want it too high or too low. But I personally believe that the top end of the range for LDL is too low. For optimal health, I prefer it close to where mine is now. Triglycerides are what u want to fear being too high. The article also goes over briefly why u want to keep triglycerides on the lower end of the range. Which I know goes against having everything in balance, but that’s why I said u want “most” markers of health not too high, and not too low. Insulin is another marker that u want as low as possible, for example.
LDL is Your Friend - David Perlmutter M.D.
LDL plays a particularly important role in brain health and function. In fact, low levels of LDL might well be associated with compromise of brain tissue.www.drperlmutter.com
And in regards to blood pressure, mine has been holding steady on average 110/60. A good amount of time I’m running a tiny bit lower. When I first started the deca base, I had a physical and BP was around 120/80. But shortly after that I switched my diet to a mostly carnivore diet, and very quickly after that BP dropped down to around 100/60 on average. I’m a nurse, and am always around BP machines. So been checking it everyday for months now, usually a few times a day to see if there’s any changes throughout the day. Which there isn’t. Pulse is the only thing that changes. Pulse in the morning is lower, and goes up about 10 beats per minute for the majority of the rest of the day. Here’s a video I watched a while back that I believe really helped with BP. Been using Celtic salt ever since. Magnesium is my other secret weapon, in regards to BP. I only drink mineral water out of glass bottles. It’s seltzer water. I drink 2 a day. So why I’ll do when I open each one is put a little Celtic salt in, and some liquid magnesium. I’ve been using Remag for years.
Ya I have. Started the deca based protocol 2-20-20. Got HCT tested beginning of June. It was 54. Donated blood a couple weeks later, and just had HCT tested again, and it’s down to 51 currently. BP was averaging around 116/70 and pulse low 60’s when HCT was 54. Now that HCT is down to 51 BP is averaging around 110/60. Pulse is still low 60’s. Pic below was taken when HCT was 51.
Attachments
slicktop
Active Member
There was a time when the notion of a round earth was laughed at, also. The atom was considered the smallest particle for most of our lifetimes. Things change. I'd laugh right at a doctor's face if he tried to put me on a statin at that level. There's more and more research showing the current take on cholesterol is likely very wrong:
"No evidence exists to prove that having high levels of bad cholesterol causes heart disease, leading physicians have claimed" in the study, reports the Daily Mail. The Express likewise says the new study finds "no evidence that high levels of 'bad' cholesterol cause heart disease."
"In fact researchers have known for decades from nutrition studies that LDL-C is not strongly correlated with cardiac risk," says Nina Teicholz, an investigative journalist and author of The New York Times bestseller The Big Fat Surprise (along with a great recent Wall St. Journal op-ed highlighting ongoing flaws in federal dietary advice). In an email to me this week, she pointed out that "physicians continue focusing on LDL-C in part because they have drugs to lower it. Doctors are driven by incentives to prescribe pills for nutrition-related diseases rather than better nutrition—a far healthier and more natural approach."
New Research Confirms We Got Cholesterol All Wrong
The U.S. government has pushed a lot of bad nutrition advice over the years. Maybe it should stop advising us on what to eat.
reason.com
Last edited:
That article is accurate to a degree but also misleading it’s accurate because they are correct that most docs are preaching 50 year old medicine about cholesterol. It’s misleading b/c it leads one to discount LDL.
The only way to get a true picture of risk is with something like Berkley or Boston Heart lab tests. These tests measure the full particle size, adherence quality, thickness etc. of both HDL and LDL particles as well as a variety of genetic markers. The article is correct that not all LDL is bad – but depending on the particle size, stickiness etc. it could be really really bad – likewise HDL could provide absolutely zero benefit if it’s not of the right consistency
But – a prudent bet is to lower all LDL and that is we are statins come in. By doing so you were automatically lowering the bad type of LDL that can only be measured with very sophisticated tests such as the ones I mentioned. (This test used to be $88 but now or over $5000 by the way).
In my case – my cardiologist ran this test and found that the really bad type of LDL is what I have as well as various genetic markers, combined with family history, yada yada yada so it made sense to start a low-dose
The only way to get a true picture of risk is with something like Berkley or Boston Heart lab tests. These tests measure the full particle size, adherence quality, thickness etc. of both HDL and LDL particles as well as a variety of genetic markers. The article is correct that not all LDL is bad – but depending on the particle size, stickiness etc. it could be really really bad – likewise HDL could provide absolutely zero benefit if it’s not of the right consistency
But – a prudent bet is to lower all LDL and that is we are statins come in. By doing so you were automatically lowering the bad type of LDL that can only be measured with very sophisticated tests such as the ones I mentioned. (This test used to be $88 but now or over $5000 by the way).
In my case – my cardiologist ran this test and found that the really bad type of LDL is what I have as well as various genetic markers, combined with family history, yada yada yada so it made sense to start a low-dose
Totally agree...too bad medical "science" is typically 2 decades behind research. Statins are the greatest hoax of modern times (COVID shares that 1st place position w/statins now)There was a time when the notion of a round earth was laughed at, also. The atom was considered the smallest particle for most of our lifetimes. Things change. I'd laugh right at a doctor's face if he tried to put me on a statin at that level. Ther'es more and more research showing the current take on cholesterol is likely very wrong:
"No evidence exists to prove that having high levels of bad cholesterol causes heart disease, leading physicians have claimed" in the study, reports the Daily Mail. The Express likewise says the new study finds "no evidence that high levels of 'bad' cholesterol cause heart disease."
"In fact researchers have known for decades from nutrition studies that LDL-C is not strongly correlated with cardiac risk," says Nina Teicholz, an investigative journalist and author of The New York Times bestseller The Big Fat Surprise (along with a great recent Wall St. Journal op-ed highlighting ongoing flaws in federal dietary advice). In an email to me this week, she pointed out that "physicians continue focusing on LDL-C in part because they have drugs to lower it. Doctors are driven by incentives to prescribe pills for nutrition-related diseases rather than better nutrition—a far healthier and more natural approach."
New Research Confirms We Got Cholesterol All Wrong
The U.S. government has pushed a lot of bad nutrition advice over the years. Maybe it should stop advising us on what to eat.
Consultant Pharmacist Certified:Advanced Hormone Otimization -WorldLink Medical
Just found this recent article on nandrolone and joint pain
Last edited:
madman
Super Moderator
hey it's been a while
(FYI while I'm at it, before statins some Doctors were treating high LDL with T3 which is much more physiological... read more here with some nice graphs The Central Role of Thyroid Hormone in Governing LDL Receptor Activity and the Risk of Heart Disease | Chris Masterjohn, PhD )
as of myself I think I made a big mistake... I went from nandrolone only to nothing for a bit, got bloodwork showing T/E2/Prog/DHEA all back in range, my idea was to just run Dutasteride for my hair. Well I don't really have any issue with 5ar inhibitors per se, but the fact of the matter is Nandrolone blows them out the water! This is direct comparison, 2 months on each drug, with 30ish days in between for Deca clearance
DHN is less androgenic than Test (so better hair, skin)
Nandrolone is more androgenic than Test (muscle gains)
I have high cortisol naturally which Nandrolone lowers a little, whereas Dut doesn't seem to touch it
Nandrolone increases insulin independent glucose transport so I get to enjoy a more flexible carby diet
No penis issues whatsoever, high energy always
No allopregnanolone issues I bet, since we keep 5ar active
All in all, Nand makes me bigger, leaner, hornier, thicker hair. No brainer really. I think if Nandrolone pills were a thing 5ar inhibitors would be out of business quick. I can see why normal people would freak out at the idea of performing UGL injections once a week or so.
(FYI while I'm at it, before statins some Doctors were treating high LDL with T3 which is much more physiological... read more here with some nice graphs The Central Role of Thyroid Hormone in Governing LDL Receptor Activity and the Risk of Heart Disease | Chris Masterjohn, PhD )
as of myself I think I made a big mistake... I went from nandrolone only to nothing for a bit, got bloodwork showing T/E2/Prog/DHEA all back in range, my idea was to just run Dutasteride for my hair. Well I don't really have any issue with 5ar inhibitors per se, but the fact of the matter is Nandrolone blows them out the water! This is direct comparison, 2 months on each drug, with 30ish days in between for Deca clearance
DHN is less androgenic than Test (so better hair, skin)
Nandrolone is more androgenic than Test (muscle gains)
I have high cortisol naturally which Nandrolone lowers a little, whereas Dut doesn't seem to touch it
Nandrolone increases insulin independent glucose transport so I get to enjoy a more flexible carby diet
No penis issues whatsoever, high energy always
No allopregnanolone issues I bet, since we keep 5ar active
All in all, Nand makes me bigger, leaner, hornier, thicker hair. No brainer really. I think if Nandrolone pills were a thing 5ar inhibitors would be out of business quick. I can see why normal people would freak out at the idea of performing UGL injections once a week or so.
madman
Super Moderator
Just to be clear AAS are synthetic derivatives of testosterone which were introduced for therapeutic purposes providing enhanced anabolic potency with reduced androgenic effects
DHN is much less androgenic than Testosterone metabolite DHT
Nandrolone is more anabolic than Testosterone (binds more strongly to the AR)
Testosterone/AAS will enhance glycogen storage (some more effective than others) and Nandrolone is no more effective than Testosterone when it comes to such.
That title would go to oxymetholone (Anadrol).
Speak for yourself when it comes to Nandrolone and muscle growth!
Regarding muscle/strength gains I would take high dose Test any day over Nandrolone.
studies agree with me. So no I won't speak for myself lol, I seldom do when i make a claim it's what data say.
But yeah high dose test will blow you up like a water buffalo. I like my gains lean, my prostate small, and my hair juvenile! Couldn't care less about strength gains, I don't need to bench XYZ pounds to feel alpha.
perhaps. I was talking about "insulin independent glucose transport", might wanna google that one?
Which studies are you referring to when you state that studies agree that nandrolone creates more muscle than testosterone?
I am showing a study here that casts some serious doubt on that state. Comparison of the effects of high dose testosterone and 19-nortestosterone to a replacement dose of testosterone on strength and body composition in normal men - PubMed
Below is a breakdown of the study I posted on another thread.
madman
Super Moderator
The drop in TT that I referred to was an error on my part. I was using the wrong blood assay (Roche I believe) and it was given me false results. If you do the correct blood assay, which I believe is liquid chromatography mass spectrometry, there will not be a drop in TT.
However, Free T should increase some resulting from the decrease in SHBG that you will see with nandrolone (or any anabolic). Most content that Free T is what makes men 'feel good'.
Nelson Vergel
Founder, ExcelMale.com
Has anyone used the LC/MS method to measure testosterone before and during nandrolone combo therapy ( with same T dose)?
Testosterone, Free (Equilibrium Dialysis) and Total, MS - Most Affordable and Accurate Test
Get an affordable and accurate testosterone test results with our Total Testosterone, M and Free (Equilibrium Dialysis) test. Visit DiscountedLabs.com for more information.
Similar threads
Share this page
Sponsors
Online statistics
- Members online
- 2
- Guests online
- 411
- Total visitors
- 413
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Struggling with bloodwork consistency. TRT bloodwork included.
- Latest: BeardedButcher55
-
